Welcome to the Lounge

Mike Hankey wrote:

Fried green tomatoes,

M.D.V.

If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

var done = false;

while(!done) {
   // do work
}

var cowsHaveComeHome = false;

while(true)...

honey the codewitch wrote:

Most of the time, I can get by with a done variable and setting it inside the loop instead of using break;.

M.D.V.

If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

GuyThiebaut wrote:

I once had a code-reviewer change my code because I used a while(true).

var HellHasFrozen

..
while (!HellHasFrozen)

Bastard Programmer from Hell
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.

honey the codewitch wrote:

But every C# dev should know how to write while(true) { }

while (true)
{
    Console.WriteLine("C# is better than Javascript!");
}

var False = true;

while(False)
{
    // code
}

youAreWrong:
   if (youThinkGotoIsEvil) goto youAreWrong;

BillWoodruff wrote:

are an abomination ... as evil as using goto

M.D.V.

If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

for i := 1 step 1 until m do.
if A[i] = x then go to found fi;
not found: i := re+l; m := i;
A[i] := x; B[i] := 0;
found: B[i] := B[i]+I; 

i:=1;
while i < m and A[i] # x do i :-- i+1;
if i > m then ra := i; A[i] := x; B[i] ::= 0 fi;
B[i] := B[i]+I;